Building Computers part 2

Over the holiday break, my 13 year old, Rudy, decides he wants to build a computer. Earlier in the fall he wanted to save up for a laptop, but found the cost to great especially for the specs he wanted. So this was the process:
I wanted this to be his project, but needed to supervise to make sure it would work. I have built computers in the past and work with them today.
Decide on budget. How much money he had after Christmas was over?
I wanted to see a spreadsheet before anything happened.
What did he want for a computer, and do you really need a 1TB hard drive?
All of the parts need to be listed with cost and shipping.
Amazing how many parts you don't know about that need to be bought. He learned
After seeing we were well above budget we started cutting back and doing more research. Found out if he packaged orders from some suppliers, the shipping was lower. We also figured out he did not need a sound card, as he uses headphones while on the computer. Video card was axed until his birthday.

As the parts arrived he installed. One problem is he lives with his mother, and I live about a half hour away from him, so some work was done over the phone, others over weekends with me, or before picking up him or his brother for various activities. I also bought him a simple book on building computers.

Typical phone conversation: "Have the Motherboard installed, power installed and memory. The book says this is a good time to test the bios. I turn it on and nothing happens!"
Me: "Is everything plugged in according to the manuals and book?"
"ummm don't know"
"did you read the manuals"
"no"
"Call me back when you did"

Half hour later another phone call "The bios works!"
"Great, now you can configure the bios and install the drives"
"uhh how do you do that?"
"read the manuals and book"

Using this process he has learned how to build the machine. If I were there, he would not have learned as much, as I would be plugging stuff in and he would wander off.

Tonight we should have the OS installed. I contacted motherboard support in search of missing SATA drivers. Just got the correct drivers, and he can install while I take older brother to robot club. I will teach him how to contact customer service next time. Amazing how much data you need for customer support.

Now back to where this fits in with PBL. This would be the third post this month related to that. He came up with the project himself, asked for guidance, I helped him understand what was needed. He did research on the topic, and then we discussed the research, and he refined his search. During the build phase, he used instructions from various sources and manuals and needed to synthesise this information into new knowledge. When he needed help he asked for specific things. His motivation was entirely intrinsic.

If we let the students choose from a range of topics to do a project, does the project become interesting? How do you best modivate students to do PBL projects,and what works best for you?

Third FIRST post

Or how Eric discovers working in a group is sometimes not fun.

A committee is a thing which takes a week to do what one good man can do in an hour. ~Elbert Hubbard

When I went to pick up Eric from his robot building session yesterday, he seemed to be upset. Sometimes when he gets upset it is not readily apparent what happened. However I anticipated this from him at anytime, and wondered what took it so long to appear. He has had a run in with “Work by Committee” the death of any Project Based Learning activity, or any activity.

When we set up group activities in the classroom we tend to assign roles to the students, the recorder, the timekeeper, the reporter and so on. In the real world these are jobs that are voted on or occur naturally. I tend to be the person moving the agenda along and trying to get rid of extraneous conversations.

Some of the most frustrating meetings I have ever been in have involved writing a document. There are always grammar people that want to parse each sentence, and argue about punctuation. There are meetings after meetings after meetings. Then eventually I just write the document, send it out and ask for changes to be sent in within 48 hours. The job then gets done.

This is similar to what Eric ran into yesterday. After getting the drive system finished for their robot, he was asked to go over and work with the electronics group, the group that makes it so the robot can move. He was happy to do so, so he went over to their group. The electronic group was discussing, not only about the layout of electronics, but everything else in the world. Eric attempted to focus the group on the task at hand with little or no success. They did cut out a cardboard piece the size of the electronics tray, but not the components. All of this in about 4 hours of work.

He is a person that takes ownership of a project and runs with it, not one to disappear into committee so that if it works they can take credit and if it does not work, it was not their fault. He has helped his brother build his computer by reading and following directions and plugging stuff in. He is like this in most projects. I am the same way, cut out the talk and let’s get to work.

Is this a good thing to do in any group project? When does something move from a group work to “my work”? How do you move in the other direction? I have had students grade each other after finishing a project, and usually someone in the group did nothing, or two of them just sat and chatted while the others did the work. It is difficult for the let’s get moving crowd to work with discussers, but with out discussion, the design may not work.

How do you draw the line in your projects to see things get done?

Second FIRST and teams

A few posts ago I wrote about FIRST Robotics. We are now about a month away from the deadline for having the machines finished and shipped out.

Seeing the students work in a real problem-solving environment is interesting. As stated before, none of us know the “real” answer, and there may not be a real answer. My son in on the “JV” team, Team 424 there is also the “varsity” Team 340. Because team 424 is first or second year members the mentors are doing more guiding, but not making the decisions. The brainstorming is interesting to hear. Ideas are listened to and discussed. Ideas from everyone. The ideas are kicked around and modified. All of the students have input, which is greater than the input of the adults. The team is moving along with some pieces being built and others being prototyped and designed in CAD. It is enjoyable to see my son working with others and contributing to the team. This is a great thing for him to be doing. This group is doing a great job of cooperative learning.

Then there is Team 340. This team is made up of the older students and for the most part has younger mentors. The concept of team decision-making is not going on. When I looked in on them yesterday, they were still arguing about concepts and about three different factions were prototyping “their robot”. Each group was sure their idea was best, and wanted to prove it. But even in this process there was little constructive criticism in the group, just criticism. Is this going to end up as a failure? I don’t think so. This is a motivated group, and eventually they will realize they need to get going and work on a robot together, even if it is near the deadline, they will get it done.

What can I draw from these observations and connect them with PBL? How are the groups different, and how does this change the group dynamic?

Both groups have a set deadline, no excuses. If they miss the shipping date, too bad, your robot will not compete.

Both groups have been given goals for each meeting, are the goals reachable for this, yes and no, and the more experienced the group, the more they are able to think through some problems posed by the game and the robot. They have a larger knowledge base than the younger group, and hence more options.

The younger group has more mentors and the mentors are more vocal with opinions, the older group, the mentors are mostly a few years older than the students, with a similar amount of experience.

The older group is made up of a bunch of leaders, the younger group has fewer leaders and more followers.

What can be done? In a week or so, team 340 will see the time is near, and will somehow decide the best method to work. They will do a good job; some will be upset and be a drag on the team.

Do we ever expect this number of leaders on a team? Can this energy be put into various parts of the robot, working in sub-groups? That will have to happen soon. As long as the sub-groups work together.

Right now, it looks dire, but I am looking forward to how they work out their problems and move forward.

FIRST things FIRST PBL and stuff

We have been talking about project based learning (PBL) in schools for several years. Last time I was in the classroom, about 9 years ago, it was getting to be an old topic. We have heard the words; we want the teacher to be the “guide on the side, not the sage on the stage.”
How far are we in this concept? I see some PBL, but generally the teacher knows the answers and is able to use guiding questions to help the students along. Is this really PBL?

Here is a Google doc with PBL lessons listed. These are all good, and remind me of some of the lessons I did (pre-computer stuff) where the students did actual real-world research, I had a science class specifically for this, and it was fun. Wore me out, but it was worth it. Having “real researchers” work with the students helped motivate and focus the research.

But do we see actual research and development by students in our classrooms?
Project Lead the Way is a good example of some of this, but again I see the teacher knowing the “answer” There is some innovation by the students, and how much depends on the teacher and their abilities.

Maybe I need a good definition of PBL? If any of you can help, that would be great.

I think there is a great program out there that is really and truly PBL. The program is FIRST Robotics. Brought to you from the same people that do the Lego league. This program is in its 18th year, which I found surprising.


My son has become involved in the “Robot Team” in a neighboring school district. His district does not offer this program; my district is pushing to start one. The purpose is not really to make robots, but introduce the students to areas of engineering with mentors who do this stuff for a living. Each year the teams are given a task for the robot to do. Here is the task for this year:




If you do search you could find previous years tasks. The teams have about 6 weeks to build a robot to do the task.
The students and mentors work side-by-side to solve the problems involved in making the robot, yes, the students are to the actual work, but the mentors are there to help with issues and ideas. It is more of a partnership between the adults and students. There is a whole lot of learning that takes place in the six weeks the students have to build.


By the way, if you were involved in this program in the past, they are looking for you in order to get an alumni database started.